An Inquiry Into the Accordancy of War with the Principles of Christianity

enough, attempted. In a late publication, of which part is devoted to the defence of war, the author gravely recommends soldiers, whilst shooting and stabbing their enemies, to maintain towards them a feeling of “good will.”

—⁠Tracts and Essays, by the late William Hey, Esq., F.R.S.

↩

It is manifest, from the New Testament, that we are not required to give “a cloak,” in every case, to him who robs us of “a coat;” but I think it is equally manifest that we are required to give it not the less because he has robbed us. The circumstance of his having robbed us does not entail an obligation to give; but it also does not impart a permission to withhold. If the necessities of the plunderer require relief, it is the business of the plundered to relieve them. ↩

Matthew 5:9. ↩

Matthew 26:51⁠–⁠52. ↩

John 18:36. ↩

In the publication to which note 29 refers, the author informs us that the reason why Christ forbade his followers to fight in his defence, was, that it would have been to oppose the government of the country. I am glad no better evasion can be found; and this would not have been found, if the author had consulted the reason assigned by the Prohibitor, before he promulgated his own. ↩

James 4:1. ↩

2 Corinthians 10:4. ↩

Matthew 8:10. ↩

See a future quotation from the Moral and Political Philosophy. ↩

Luke 22:36. ↩

Acts 1:6. ↩

Isaiah 2:4. ↩

Isaiah 11:9. ↩

Isaiah 60:18. ↩

Galatians 1:8. ↩

“Essays on the Doctrines and Practice of the Early Christians as They Relate to War.” To this Essay I am indebted for much information on the present part of our subject. ↩

Pol. Ep. ad Phil. c. 2.

—⁠Evidences of Christianity

↩

These examples might be multiplied. Enough, however, have been given to establish our position, and the reader who desires further or more immediate information, is referred to Justin Mart. in Dialog. cum Tryph. ejusdemque Apolog. 2⁠—Ad Zenam: Tertull. De Corona Militis.⁠—Apolog. cap. 21 and 37.⁠—Lib. de Idol. c. 17, 18, 19.⁠—Ad Scapulum cap. 1. Adversus Jud. cap. 7 and 9.⁠—Adv. Gnost. 13.⁠—Adv. Marc. c. 4.⁠—Lib. de Patient., c. 6. 10: Orig. Cont. Celsum lib. 3, 5, 8.⁠—In Josuam, hom. 12. cap. 9.⁠—in Mat. cap. 26. Tract 36: Cypr. Epist. 56⁠—Ad Cornel. Lactan. De Just. lib. 5. c. 18. lib. 6. c. 20: Ambr. in Luc. 22. Chrysost. in Matth. 5. hom. 18.⁠—in Matth. 26. hom. 85.⁠—lib. 2. De Sacerdotio. 1 Cor. 13: Chromat. in Matt. 5. Hieron. Ad Ocean.⁠—lib. Epist. p. 3. tom. 1. Ep. 2: Athan. De Inc. Verb. Dei: Cyrill. Alex. lib. 11. in Johan. cap. 25, 26. See also Erasmus, Luc. cap. 3, and 22. Ludov. Vives in Introd. ad Sap.: I. Ferus lib. 4 Comment in Matth. 7 and Luc. 22. ↩

Deuteronomy 21:18, 21. ↩

Deuteronomy 13:9. ↩

John 16:3. ↩

Moral and Political Philosophy, Chap. “Of War and Military Establishments.” ↩

Moral and Political Philosophy, Chap. “Of War and Military Establishments.” ↩

I do not know why “the profession of a soldier” is substituted for the simple term, war. Dr. P. does not say that war is nowhere forbidden or condemned, which censure or prohibition it is obviously easy to have pronounced without even noticing “the profession of a soldier.” I do not say that this language implies a want of ingenuousness, but it certainly was more easy to prove that the profession of a soldier is nowhere condemned, than that war is nowhere condemned. ↩

Moral and Political Philosophy, Book II. Chap. 4. ↩

I must be just. After these declarations, the author says, that when the laws which inculcate the Christian character, are applied to what is necessary to be done for the sake of the public, they are applied to a case to which they do not belong; and he adds, “This distinction is plain,” but in what its plainness consists, or how it is discovered at all, he does not inform us. The reader will probably wonder, as I do, that whilst Paley says no two things can be more opposite than the Christian and the heroic characters, he nevertheless thinks it “is plain” that Christianity sanctions the latter.

I would take the opportunity afforded me by this note, to entreat the reader to look over the whole of Chap. 2, Part II in the Evidences of Christianity. He will find many observations on the placability of the gospel, which will repay the time of reading them. ↩

Montagu on Punishment of Death. ↩

Contr. Soc. II 5. Montagu. ↩

Del Delitti e delia Penes, XVI. Montagu. ↩

Moral and Political Philosophy. ↩

“The Lawfulness of Defensive War Impartially Considered, by a Member of the Church of England.” ↩